Identifying Potential Classification Criteria for Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition Disease: Item Generation and Item Reduction.

OBJECTIVE: Classification criteria for calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) disease will facilitate clinical research on this common crystalline arthritis. Our objective was to report on the first 2 phases of a 4-phase process for developing CPPD classification criteria. METHODS: CPPD classification criteria development is overseen by a 12-member steering committee. Item generation (phase I) included a scoping literature review of 5 literature databases and contributions from a 35-member combined expert committee and 2 patient research partners. Item reduction and refinement (phase II) involved a combined expert committee meeting, discussions among clinical, imaging, and laboratory advisory groups, and an item-rating exercise to assess the influence of individual items toward classification. The steering committee reviewed the modal rating score for each item (range -3 [strongly pushes away from CPPD] to +3 [strongly pushes toward CPPD]) to determine items to retain for future phases of criteria development. RESULTS: Item generation yielded 420 items (312 from the literature, 108 from experts/patients). The advisory groups eliminated items that they agreed were unlikely to distinguish between CPPD and other forms of arthritis, yielding 127 items for the item-rating exercise. Fifty-six items, most of which had a modal rating of +/- 2 or 3, were retained for future phases. As numerous imaging items were rated +3, the steering committee recommended focusing on imaging of the knee and wrist and 1 additional affected joint for calcification suggestive of CPP crystal deposition. CONCLUSION: A data- and expert-driven process is underway to develop CPPD classification criteria. Candidate items comprise clinical, imaging, and laboratory features.

Multicriteria decision analysis process to develop new classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus.

European League Against Rheumatism and are jointly supporting multiphase development of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria based on weighted criteria and a continuous probability scale. Prior steps included item generation, item reduction and hierarchical organisation of candidate criteria using an evidence-based approach. Our objectives were to determine relative weights using multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) and to set a provisional threshold score for SLE classification. An SLE Expert Panel (8 European, 9 North American) submitted 164 real, unique cases with a wide range of SLE probability in a standardised format. Using the candidate criteria, experts scored and rank-ordered 20 representative cases. At an in-person meeting, experts reviewed inter-rater reliability of scoring, further refined criteria definitions and participated in an MCDA exercise. Based on expert consensus decisions on pairwise comparisons of criteria, 1000minds software calculated criteria weights and rank-ordered the remaining 144 cases based on their additive scores. The score of the lowest-ranked case for which complete expert consensus was achieved defined the provisional threshold classification score. Inter-rater reliability of scoring cases with the candidate criteria was good. MCDA involved 74 pairwise decisions and was repeated for the arthritis and mucocutaneous domains when the initial ranking of some cases did not match expert opinion. After criteria weights and additive scores were recalculated once, experts reached consensus for SLE classification for all cases scoring>83. Using an iterative process, the candidate criteria definitions were refined, preliminary weights were calculated and a provisional threshold score for SLE classification was determined.

Developing and Refining New Candidate Criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification: An International Collaboration.

OBJECTIVE: To define candidate criteria within multiphase development of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria, jointly supported by the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism. Prior steps included item generation and reduction by Delphi exercise, further narrowed to 21 items in a nominal group technique exercise. Our objectives were to apply an evidence-based approach to the 21 candidate criteria, and to develop hierarchical organization of criteria within domains. METHODS: A literature review identified the sensitivity and specificity of the 21 candidate criteria. Data on the performance of antinuclear antibody (ANA) as an entry criterion and operating characteristics of the candidate criteria in early SLE patients were evaluated. Candidate criteria were hierarchically organized into clinical and immunologic domains, and definitions were refined in an iterative process. RESULTS: Based on the data, consensus was reached to use a positive ANA of ≥1:80 titer (HEp-2 cells immunofluorescence) as an entry criterion and to have 7 clinical and 3 immunologic domains, with hierarchical organization of criteria within domains. Definitions of the candidate criteria were specified. CONCLUSION: Using a data-driven process, consensus was reached on new, refined criteria definitions and organization based on operating characteristics. This work will be followed by a multicriteria decision analysis exercise to weight criteria and to identify a threshold score for classification on a continuous probability scale.

2015 Gout classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Existing criteria for the classification of gout have suboptimal sensitivity and/or specificity, and were developed at a time when advanced imaging was not available. The current effort was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for gout. METHODS: An international group of investigators, supported by the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism, conducted a systematic review of the literature on advanced imaging of gout, a diagnostic study in which the presence of monosodium urate monohydrate (MSU) crystals in synovial fluid or tophus was the gold standard, a ranking exercise of paper patient cases, and a multi-criterion decision analysis exercise. These data formed the basis for developing the classification criteria, which were tested in an independent data set. RESULTS: The entry criterion for the new classification criteria requires the occurrence of at least one episode of peripheral joint or bursal swelling, pain, or tenderness. The presence of MSU crystals in a symptomatic joint/bursa (ie, synovial fluid) or in a tophus is a sufficient criterion for classification of the subject as having gout, and does not require further scoring. The domains of the new classification criteria include clinical (pattern of joint/bursa involvement, characteristics and time course of symptomatic episodes), laboratory (serum urate, MSU-negative synovial fluid aspirate), and imaging (double-contour sign on ultrasound or urate on dual-energy CT, radiographic gout-related erosion). The sensitivity and specificity of the criteria are high (92% and 89%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The new classification criteria, developed using a data-driven and decision-analytic approach, have excellent performance characteristics and incorporate current state-of-the-art evidence regarding gout.

2015 Gout Classification Criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Existing criteria for the classification of gout have suboptimal sensitivity and/or specificity, and were developed at a time when advanced imaging was not available. The current effort was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for gout. METHODS: An international group of investigators, supported by the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism, conducted a systematic review of the literature on advanced imaging of gout, a diagnostic study in which the presence of monosodium urate monohydrate (MSU) crystals in synovial fluid or tophus was the gold standard, a ranking exercise of paper patient cases, and a multicriterion decision analysis exercise. These data formed the basis for developing the classification criteria, which were tested in an independent data set. RESULTS: The entry criterion for the new classification criteria requires the occurrence of at least 1 episode of peripheral joint or bursal swelling, pain, or tenderness. The presence of MSU crystals in a symptomatic joint/bursa (i.e., synovial fluid) or in a tophus is a sufficient criterion for classification of the subject as having gout, and does not require further scoring. The domains of the new classification criteria include clinical (pattern of joint/bursa involvement, characteristics and time course of symptomatic episodes), laboratory (serum urate, MSU-negative synovial fluid aspirate), and imaging (double-contour sign on ultrasound or urate on dual-energy computed tomography, radiographic gout-related erosion). The sensitivity and specificity of the criteria are high (92% and 89%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The new classification criteria, developed using a data-driven and decision analytic approach, have excellent performance characteristics and incorporate current state-of-the-art evidence regarding gout.

Multicriteria decision analysis methods with 1000Minds for developing systemic sclerosis classification criteria.

OBJECTIVES: Classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) are being developed. The objectives were to develop an instrument for collating case data and evaluate its sensibility; use forced-choice methods to reduce and weight criteria; and explore agreement among experts on the probability that cases were classified as SSc. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A standardized instrument was tested for sensibility. The instrument was applied to 20 cases covering a range of probabilities that each had SSc. Experts rank ordered cases from highest to lowest probability; reduced and weighted the criteria using forced-choice methods; and reranked the cases. Consistency in rankings was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: Experts endorsed clarity (83%), comprehensibility (100%), face and content validity (100%). Criteria were weighted (points): finger skin thickening (14-22), fingertip lesions (9-21), friction rubs (21), finger flexion contractures (16), pulmonary fibrosis (14), SSc-related antibodies (15), Raynaud phenomenon (13), calcinosis (12), pulmonary hypertension (11), renal crisis (11), telangiectasia (10), abnormal nailfold capillaries (10), esophageal dilation (7), and puffy fingers (5). The ICC across experts was 0.73 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.58, 0.86] and improved to 0.80 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Using a sensible instrument and forced-choice methods, the number of criteria were reduced by 39% (range, 23-14) and weighted. Our methods reflect the rigors of measurement science and serve as a template for developing classification criteria.

2013 classification criteria for systemic sclerosis: an American College of Rheumatology/European League against Rheumatism collaborative initiative.

OBJECTIVE: The 1980 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) lack sensitivity for early SSc and limited cutaneous SSc. The present work, by a joint committee of the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), was undertaken for the purpose of developing new classification criteria for SSc. METHODS: Using consensus methods, 23 candidate items were arranged in a multicriteria additive point system with a threshold to classify cases as SSc. The classification system was reduced by clustering items and simplifying weights. The system was tested by 1) determining specificity and sensitivity in SSc cases and controls with scleroderma-like disorders, and 2) validating against the combined view of a group of experts on a set of cases with or without SSc. RESULTS: It was determined that skin thickening of the fingers extending proximal to the metacarpophalangeal joints is sufficient for the patient to be classified as having SSc; if that is not present, 7 additive items apply, with varying weights for each: skin thickening of the fingers, fingertip lesions, telangiectasia, abnormal nailfold capillaries, interstitial lung disease or pulmonary arterial hypertension, Raynaud's phenomenon, and SSc-related autoantibodies. Sensitivity and specificity in the validation sample were, respectively, 0.91 and 0.92 for the new classification criteria and 0.75 and 0.72 for the 1980 ACR classification criteria. All selected cases were classified in accordance with consensus-based expert opinion. All cases classified as SSc according to the 1980 ACR criteria were classified as SSc with the new criteria, and several additional cases were now considered to be SSc. CONCLUSION: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria for SSc and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.

2013 classification criteria for systemic sclerosis: an American college of rheumatology/European league against rheumatism collaborative initiative.

OBJECTIVE: The 1980 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) lack sensitivity for early SSc and limited cutaneous SSc. The present work, by a joint committee of the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), was undertaken for the purpose of developing new classification criteria for SSc. METHODS: Using consensus methods, 23 candidate items were arranged in a multicriteria additive point system with a threshold to classify cases as SSc. The classification system was reduced by clustering items and simplifying weights. The system was tested by (1) determining specificity and sensitivity in SSc cases and controls with scleroderma-like disorders, and (2) validating against the combined view of a group of experts on a set of cases with or without SSc. RESULTS: It was determined that skin thickening of the fingers extending proximal to the metacarpophalangeal joints is sufficient for the patient to be classified as having SSc; if that is not present, seven additive items apply, with varying weights for each: skin thickening of the fingers, fingertip lesions, telangiectasia, abnormal nailfold capillaries, interstitial lung disease or pulmonary arterial hypertension, Raynaud's phenomenon, and SSc-related autoantibodies. Sensitivity and specificity in the validation sample were, respectively, 0.91 and 0.92 for the new classification criteria and 0.75 and 0.72 for the 1980 ACR classification criteria. All selected cases were classified in accordance with consensus-based expert opinion. All cases classified as SSc according to the 1980 ACR criteria were classified as SSc with the new criteria, and several additional cases were now considered to be SSc. CONCLUSIONS: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria for SSc and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.